News
SpaceX’s orbital Starship launch debut may be pushed to 2022 by slow FAA reviews
In a rare sign of material progress, SpaceX and the FAA have finally released what is known as a draft environmental assessment (EA) of the company’s South Texas Starship launch plans.
Set to be the largest and most powerful rocket in spaceflight history when it first begins orbital launches, the process of acquiring permission to launch Starship and its Super Heavy booster out of the wetlands of the South Texas coast was never going to be easy. The Boca Chica site SpaceX ultimately settled on for its first private launch facilities – initially meant for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy but later dedicated to BFR (now Starship) – is simultaneously surrounded by sensitive coastal habitats populated by several threatened or endangered species and situated mere miles as the crow flies from a city whose temporary population oscillates from a few thousand to tens of thousands.
Reception and analysis of the draft and its timing have been mixed. On one hand, SpaceX’s draft EA – completed with oversight from the FAA and help from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) – gives a number of reasons for optimism. In a sign that SpaceX is taking a pragmatic approach to the inevitable environmental review and launch license approval hurdles standing in front of orbital South Texas Starship launches, the company has actually pursued what is known as a “programmatic environmental assessment” (PEA).
Most importantly, that means that SpaceX’s Starbase PEA – if approved – will be more like a foundation or stepping stone that should make it easier to start small and methodically expand the scope and nature of the company’s plans for Boca Chica. Along those lines, as part of Starbase’s first dedicated environmental assessment, SpaceX has proposed a maximum of 23 flight operations annually while Starship is still in the development phase, including up to 20 suborbital Starship test flights and 3 orbital launches (or Super Heavy hops). Once SpaceX has worked out enough kinks for slightly more confident Starship operations, the company would enter an “operational phase” that would allow for as many as five suborbital Starship launches and five orbital Starship launches, as well as ship and booster landings back on land after all 10 possible launches.
In other words, SpaceX’s initial draft PEA is extremely conservative, requesting permission for what amounts to a bare minimum concept of operations for orbital Starship launches. At a maximum of 3-5 orbital launches per year, a PEA and subsequent launch license approved as-is would likely give SpaceX just enough slack to perform basic Earth orbit launches and no more than one or two orbital refilling tests per year. However, as an example, a five-launch maximum would almost entirely prevent SpaceX from launching Starship to Mars, the Moon, and maybe even high-energy Earth orbits without using all of its annual launch allotments on a single mission.
Perhaps most importantly, the draft PEA as proposed would unequivocally prevent SpaceX from performing the NASA Human Lander System (HLS) Moon landings it received an almost $3 billion contract to complete. Each HLS Starship Moon landing is expected to require anywhere from 10-16 launches to deliver a depot ship, HLS lander, and ~1200 tons of propellant to orbit. However, in terms of SpaceX’s prospects of developing Starship as quickly as possible, that’s actually a good thing. Above all else, SpaceX’s slimmed-down draft PEA should be far easier for the FAA to approve than a PEA pursuing permission for Starship’s ultimate ambitions – dozens to hundreds of launches annually – from the beginning. In theory, with this barebones PEA approved, SpaceX would then be able to build off the foundation with additional environmental assessments – like, for example, of expanding Starship’s maximum launch cadence.
Of course, SpaceX first needs the FAA turn this first draft PEA into a favorable environmental assessment (not a guarantee) before any of the above starts to matter. Based on the content of the draft itself and associated appendixes, SpaceX appears to have a decent shot at receiving a “finding of no significant impact (FONSI)” or “mitigated FONSI” determination. However, SpaceX began the process of creating that draft as far back as mid-2020, followed by an FAA announcement in November 2020. The implication is that the FAA managed to drag out a draft release process that some have estimated should have taken 3-4 months into an arduous 10-15 month ordeal.
Combined with the uphill battle it’s starting to look like SpaceX will have to wage for an orbital Starship launch license in South Texas, it’s looking increasingly likely that Starship, Super Heavy, and Starbase will be technically ready for orbital launch tests well before the FAA is ready to approve or license them. Barring delays, the public now has until mid-October to read and comment on SpaceX’s draft PEA, after which the FAA and SpaceX will review those comments and hopefully turn the draft into a completed review. Even if the FAA were to somehow take just two months to return a best-case FONSI, clearing Starbase of environmental launch hurdles, it’s hard to imagine that the agency could then turn around and approve an orbital Starship launch license – or even a one-off experimental permit – in the last few weeks of 2021.
Ultimately, that means that nothing short of a minor miracle is likely to prevent the FAA’s environmental review and licensing delays from directly delaying Starship’s orbital launch debut. There is at least a chance that Starship, Super Heavy, and Starbase’s orbital launch site wont be ready for orbital launches by the end of the year, but it’s increasingly difficult to imagine that all three won’t be proof tested, qualified, and ready for action just a month or two from now. For the time being, we’ll just have to wait and see where the cards fall.
Energy
Tesla Powerwall distribution expands in Australia
Inventory is expected to arrive in late February and official sales are expected to start mid-March 2026.
Supply Partners Group has secured a distribution agreement for the Tesla Powerwall in Australia, with inventory expected to arrive in late February and official sales beginning in mid-March 2026.
Under the new agreement, Supply Partners will distribute Tesla Powerwall units and related accessories across its national footprint, as noted in an ecogeneration report. The company said the addition strengthens its position as a distributor focused on premium, established brands.
“We are proud to officially welcome Tesla Powerwall into the Supply Partners portfolio,” Lliam Ricketts, Co-Founder and Director of Innovation at Supply Partners Group, stated.
“Tesla sets a high bar, and we’ve worked hard to earn the opportunity to represent a brand that customers actively ask for. This partnership reflects the strength of our logistics, technical services and customer experience, and it’s a win for installers who want premium options they can trust.”
Supply Partners noted that initial Tesla Powerwall stock will be warehoused locally before full commercial rollout in March. The distributor stated that the timing aligns with renewed growth momentum for the Powerwall, supported by competitive installer pricing, consumer rebates, and continued product and software updates.
“Powerwall is already a category-defining product, and what’s ahead makes it even more compelling,” Ricketts stated. “As pricing sharpens and capability expands, we see a clear runway for installers to confidently spec Powerwall for premium residential installs, backed by Supply Partners’ national distribution footprint and service model.”
Supply Partners noted that a joint go-to-market launch is planned, including Tesla-led training for its sales and technical teams to support installers during the home battery system’s domestic rollout.
Elon Musk
Tesla Giga Berlin growth could stall if not “free from external influences”: Elon Musk
The comments were delivered in a pre-recorded video discussion.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has reportedly warned that future expansion of Gigafactory Berlin could be jeopardized if the site does not remain “free from external influences.”
Musk’s comments were delivered in a pre-recorded video discussion with employees and came at a sensitive moment for the facility, where union representation has been a recurring issue.
According to reports from Handelsblatt and Der Spiegel, citing participants at the event, Musk suggested that if Giga Berlin is no longer “free from external influences,” further expansion would become unlikely. He did not, however, hint that the plant would shut down.
While Musk did not name IG Metall directly, his remarks were widely interpreted as referencing the union, which is currently the largest faction on the works council but does not hold a majority, as noted in an electrive report.
The video conversation was conducted between Musk in Austin and Grünheide plant manager André Thierig, then played back to the workforce in Germany. Works council elections are scheduled for early March, heightening the tension between management and organized labor.
The CEO has previously voiced concerns that stronger union influence could limit Tesla’s operational flexibility and long-term strategy in Germany.
Despite the warning on expansion, Musk praised the Giga Berlin site during the same address, describing it as one of the most advanced factories worldwide and highlighting its cleanliness and team culture.
The discussion also reportedly touched on battery cell production. According to attendees cited in German media, Musk indicated that Tesla has begun ramping cell production at the site. That would mark a notable shift from earlier expectations that large-scale cell manufacturing in Brandenburg would not begin until 2027.
Elon Musk
Tesla Full Self-Driving’s newest behavior is the perfect answer to aggressive cars
According to a recent video, it now appears the suite will automatically pull over if there is a tailgater on your bumper, the most ideal solution for when a driver is riding your bumper.
Tesla Full Self-Driving appears to have a new behavior that is the perfect answer to aggressive drivers.
According to a recent video, it now appears the suite will automatically pull over if there is a tailgater on your bumper, the most ideal solution for when a driver is riding your bumper.
With FSD’s constantly-changing Speed Profiles, it seems as if this solution could help eliminate the need to tinker with driving modes from the person in the driver’s seat. This tends to be one of my biggest complaints from FSD at times.
A video posted on X shows a Tesla on Full Self-Driving pulling over to the shoulder on windy, wet roads after another car seemed to be following it quite aggressively. The car looks to have automatically sensed that the vehicle behind it was in a bit of a hurry, so FSD determined that pulling over and letting it by was the best idea:
Tesla appears to be implementing some sort of feature that will now pull over if someone is tailgating you to let the car by
Really cool feature, definitely get a lot of this from those who think they drive race cars
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 26, 2026
We can see from the clip that there was no human intervention to pull over to the side, as the driver’s hands are stationary and never interfere with the turn signal stalk.
This can be used to override some of the decisions FSD makes, and is a great way to get things back on track if the semi-autonomous functionality tries to do something that is either unneeded or not included in the routing on the in-car Nav.
FSD tends to move over for faster traffic on the interstate when there are multiple lanes. On two-lane highways, it will pass slower cars using the left lane. When faster traffic is behind a Tesla on FSD, the vehicle will move back over to the right lane, the correct behavior in a scenario like this.
Perhaps one of my biggest complaints at times with Full Self-Driving, especially from version to version, is how much tinkering Tesla does with Speed Profiles. One minute, they’re suitable for driving on local roads, the next, they’re either too fast or too slow.
When they are too slow, most of us just shift up into a faster setting, but at times, even that’s not enough, see below:
What has happened to Mad Max?
At one point it was going 32 in a 35. Traffic ahead had pulled away considerably https://t.co/bjKvaMVTNX pic.twitter.com/aaZSWmLu5v
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 24, 2026
There are times when it feels like it would be suitable for the car to just pull over and let the vehicle that is traveling behind pass. This, at least up until this point, it appears, was something that required human intervention.
Now, it looks like Tesla is trying to get FSD to a point where it just knows that it should probably get out of the way.
Tesla Powerwall distribution expands in Australia
Tesla Giga Berlin growth could stall if not “free from external influences”: Elon Musk
